首页> 外文OA文献 >Resolving whistleblowing disputes in the public interest: is tribunal adjudication the best that can be offered?
【2h】

Resolving whistleblowing disputes in the public interest: is tribunal adjudication the best that can be offered?

机译:解决出于公共利益的举报纠纷:法庭裁决是最好的选择吗?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This article argues that employment tribunal adjudication may be both a difficult and ineffective mechanism for resolving whistleblowing disputes. The author asserts that, if disclosures of serious wrongdoing are to be encouraged, both the law and dispute resolution mechanisms need to be improved. Ideally, employers should have whistleblowing procedures which provide for conciliation, mediation and arbitration as alternative forms of redress for those who feel that their disclosures have not been dealt with properly or have allegedly suffered retaliation. Recognising that a legal obligation to have effective whistleblowing arrangements is unlikely to be imposed by law, the author suggests that alternative dispute resolution mechanisms should be made available where whistleblowing claims are lodged with employment tribunals.
机译:本文认为,就业法庭的裁决可能是解决举报纠纷的既困难又无效的机制。作者主张,如果要鼓励披露严重不当行为,则法律和争议解决机制都需要改进。理想情况下,雇主应该采用举报程序,规定调解,调解和仲裁,作为对那些认为自己的披露没有得到适当处理或据称遭受报复的人的替代补救。鉴于认识到法律不太可能规定具有有效举报安排的法律义务,因此,作者建议,在向就业法庭提出举报要求的情况下,应提供替代的争议解决机制。

著录项

  • 作者

    Lewis, David B.;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2013
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 {"code":"en","name":"English","id":9}
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号